:Thanks for flagging and @[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] for handling while I was offline. Wonder what the obsession is! <span style="font-family:Calibri; font-weight:bold;">[[User:Star Mississippi|<span style="color:#a117f2;">Star</span>]] [[User talk:Star Mississippi|<span style="color:#df00fe;">Mississippi</span>]]</span> 23:24, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
:Thanks for flagging and @[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] for handling while I was offline. Wonder what the obsession is! <span style="font-family:Calibri; font-weight:bold;">[[User:Star Mississippi|<span style="color:#a117f2;">Star</span>]] [[User talk:Star Mississippi|<span style="color:#df00fe;">Mississippi</span>]]</span> 23:24, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
==Murder of Louise Smith=
Hi, could I please see this deleted article. [[User:Davidgoodheart]][[User:Davidgoodheart|Davidgoodheart]] ([[User talk:Davidgoodheart|talk]]) 16:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Revision as of 16:15, 27 August 2023
This page is automagically archived by a botservant. Really old archives are immediately below by year, month. 2010 and forward are in the box below.
Hi there. Just want to let you know that within the last 24 hours, our old friend Big Towel has returned -- still editing on the same IP 98.186.55.18 after their block expired. This time, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. It does not look promising however: they have already submitted at least three drafts to WP:AFC -- and to no surprise they were all rejected on WP:TOOSOON grounds. If it comes to it, I'll let you make the call if you want to act sooner than I would. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up @Zzyzx11 and apologies for the delayed response as I've been offline. Please let me know if you still need my eyes - but if the disruption turns time sensitive in the coming days, you may need to grab an active admin for quick action. StarMississippi02:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely not in good faith. Since @Novem Linguae declined the G4, I'm going to take it to AfD. I don't know if there's enough for an SPI, but enough folks more experienced there will likely be at the AfD if that becomes a factor. StarMississippi12:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It might still qualify under G11 so I left that tag active. I am still calibrating my G11's so I would like a different admin to take a look :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This was my nom before @Bbb23 handled it (thank you!)
"Here because the speedy has been declined as the most recent recreation today is longer, which makes sense. However, it does not appear that the factors from the prior AfD have changed. Avin does not appear to be notable. As an aside: The original creator has been blocked for UPE and COI concerns have been raised with Kiava (@SamX and TheManInTheBlackHat:) and this reads like paid for promotion "This milestone not only brought Avin the recognition he deserved but also paved the way for future projects" so it's possible further steps need to be taken should this close as delete."
I just yanked email after they sent another after my warning. Given that they were pestering for a review, I'm sure they're not the only one. Disclosing here in case folks think it's too involved but given their response to your warning @Bbb23, I think they're en route to losing TPA as well. StarMississippi19:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly they're just making a mess of things. There's a fairly high level of incompetence, at least with the English language. They can't seem to leave things alone. They should just wait for an admin to review their unblock request, but they're obviously impatient and waiting doesn't seem to be one of their virtues.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's so weird, they didn't care about the drafts until now and why now. It's like it it should impact their ability to get paid work since I think most were just G13 so "no fault".
I was hoping to get your opinion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan. It's a bundled nomination that is mainly based on the fact that the page creator wasn't extended confirmed when they created the articles which is required for this subject area. The problem is that the nomination keeps changing with some articles being struck out or the nominator seeking a Merge rather than article deletion. It's a lot for participants to evaluate and changes have been made to the nomination after editors have already voiced their opinions. I'm unsure of what to do but I'm considering a procedural close. Sockpuppets aside, I haven't run into an AFD where deletion is sought because of the status of the editor who created the page not on the quality of the article. What do you think?
Morning @Liz. Oh no on the heat. Hope you have a means of staying cool. I am OVER summer.
Yep. Trainwreck. I'd probably have closed it on those grounds. I'm not certain whether creation in violation of GS is an auto delete ala G5, but assuming it isn't, or one of the passing admins such as @Rosguill would have speedied, I'd have kicked it back for a proper nomination that separated out what needed merging v. deletion and conduct v. content. I can't find it now, but there were at least two I closed as "nope, try again". One was a bundled sports discussion that had no hope of consensus and another was sock creator, sock nom. There's definitely a difference between "admins are charged with determining consensus" and "throw spaghetti at a wall and make them sort it out" StarMississippi13:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of GS interaction with G5 is that it's a gray area. Admins are allowed to delete articles created in violation of GS and similar sanctions, but we're encouraged to use our discretion as to whether that is necessary. Once the article has been brought to AfD, it's not clear whether admins still have that level of unilateral discretion, particularly once uninvolved editors vouch for keep. The advice I gave to Kevo is that CTOPS/GS enforcement should either be unilaterally handled with a BLAR, or brought to AE; I would also review and consider actioning an actual G5 tag placed on such an article. signed, Rosguilltalk15:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:General sanctions/Armenia and Azerbaijan says “ Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.” So if we’re at AFD, I’d be inclined to just let the community decide, after ECPing the articles and the AFD. That said, these sanctions seem spectacularly unused and forgotten about. And that AFD is a train wreck. I think I’d procedurally close that and create separate nominations for each article, maybe? Unless you want to delete everything citing the GS that seems the only useful way forward. Courcelles (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both @Courcelles @Rosguill. Definitely helpful in terms of navigating sanction areas.
I wish there were a technical way to implement these ECP restrictions (and other topic bans) for two reasons: the wasted community time and general drama when someone violates a topic ban and scenarios where a new editor is technically allowed to create something but procedurally disallowed from doing so. Are there new editors caught in this, or just new accounts? In this specific instance, I have no idea as I'm not super familiar with the problem editors in that area.
Aside from new accounts created to relitigate old fights, I'd guess that in AA and Israel/Palestine there's way too much nuance for a new editor to successfully create an article, or one would exist. (Possibly true too of American politics, but I feel like there it's more likely that there are tangentially related red links who might not be as fraught)
I tried to add guidance for these areas to the NPP tutorial in an effort to get them more widely applied but got voted down fairly decisively. I agree that it's a landmine for newer editors, and more experienced editors' outside the topic areas are often frustratingly unfamiliar with the regimes (c.f. the AfD keep !votes). All that having been said, there really isn't a way to implement a technical block given how we define topics on Wikipedia--the most we could do would be to add an edit filter that checks for "Israel", "Palestine", "Armenia" etc. and displays a warning a la deprecated sources if you aren't EC. Realistically this would only keep out well-behaved and diligent new editors, but maybe that's a worthwhile drama-avoiding intervention.
To my recollection, I've unilaterally deleted an article for violating ECP only once, an article titled something ridiculous like Battle of Baghdad (1953) about a purported Mossad operation in Iraq with sources that didn't support most of the claims in the article, and where even if true would certainly not be called the named title. signed, Rosguilltalk16:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I vaguely remember some discussion once about category blocks being shouted down as letting anyone expand the block. And, of course, non-existent pages can’t be added to categories. And country names are going to appear on pages well outside the conflict. Courcelles (talk) 17:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes. That certainly went pear shaped. I can't tell whether Movaigonel truly didn't know they weren't eligible or whether they were just interested in finger pointing and arguing.
Morning @Star Mississippi: How are you? I was planing to promote this to mainspace but I see it is "create protected". It seems to be have been Afd'dthree times I think, but now due to nature of OpenAI and ChatGPT, I think it is more than borderline notable. Can you please remove the protection bit on it. Thanks. scope_creepTalk09:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All set! At a quick glance, I agree with your assessment but either way, the issues that led to protection are long stale and there's no reason not to mainspace it. Hope you're safe from fire smoke and other issues. StarMississippi13:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I made the edit to the page for Festival Fatale, adding detail to Tara Clark (Actor and Playwright). This addition was cited with multiple sources. I don't understand why you then made the following revision, restoring the previous version.
17:26, 20 July 2023 Star Mississippi talk contribs 3,192 bytes −253 Restored revision 1163266798 by Star Mississippi (talk): -promotion, likely sock undo Tags: Twinkle Undo
Hi IP 84. Community consensus was that Clark could be mentioned, which she is, but we don't need four references promoting her work.
Especially for a living person, we need high quality sourcing which the ones you provided were not.
Are you new, or are you editing logged out because multiple accounts have been adding that same information and seeking to promote Clark's work. StarMississippi18:25, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! When you get a moment, would you mind looking over this AFD I closed a few days ago? There's a short discussion at my talk page asking about it. I don't really have any strong feelings about it one way or the other, and I could see a close going either way. Do you think I handled that one poorly? If so, what's the best next step? Joyous!Noise!21:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! you caught me just as I'm about to hop offline for a few hours. I'll look at it and the discussion this evening or early tomorrow morning. StarMississippi21:12, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you are actually in the steamy southeastern US, then I'm amazed you found a day in July to be outside. Congratulations! (I'm in coastal WA, where flannel is a year-round choice.) Joyous!Noise!02:23, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that would be delicious! A year ago this week I was packing for Alaska and I spent a few weeks this May at altitude in Wyoming. Summer definitely makes me question my east coast life choices! Hope you've been spared the fire smoke. StarMississippi02:52, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh.... So, would it be ridiculous to bring this to DRV myself, as the closer? A deletion re-discussion is playing itself out on my talk page, and while everyone is being excruciatingly polite, I don't want this drawn out forever. Joyous!Noise!20:54, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! You can do that, or if you're comfortable with more input, you can relist it directly.
With such a weak consensus, I imagine DRV might kick it back to AfD anyway so this way you could save seven DRV days and just have the AfD ones.
Glad everyone is being polite-you did nothing "wrong", we just have a difference of opinions on the outcome so glad to see manners in place. That's thankfully always been my experience with CNM. StarMississippi01:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How does relisting a closed discussion work? Do I just re-tag the article? Or revert the old close? PS Thank you so much for your help: I rarely close contentious discussions, so this aspect is rather new. Joyous!Noise!04:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! You can just revert your close, which will restore the tag and relist it so it gets on today's log. When I do so I generally leave a second comment under the relist note to fully explain/link to the discussion. Happy to do on your behalf if you prefer? StarMississippi00:50, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted the article to put the AFD tag back and reverted the talk page AFD tag as well. So, back as it was before the closure. LizRead!Talk!04:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thanks for closing the above-linked AfD. As you suggested, I‘d be great if I could see the article to take whatever’s worth salvaging if I do go on to write a new article on the topic. How is that usually handled? Actualcpscm (talk) 15:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When I offer on close as I did here it's to save you, me and REFUND patrollers that step so here you go Draft:Genetics and educational attainment. Normally I'd say an editor of your standing doesn't need to go through AfC-and you don't have to - but in this case I'd suggest it given the unanimity of the deletion opinion and the complex subject. I'm not watching the page, so ping me if you need anything further on it. Happy editing! StarMississippi15:26, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've written a draft at Draft:Genetics and educational attainment (2); I would submit it to AFC, but I'm considering letting the participants at the AFD know about this to get their feedback first. I think it might be more useful to have the editors who know the context of the original version take a look. The context and history of this subject matters, but I'd be pinging a total of 13 editors, and I'd prefer not to select any subset of them to avoid any appearance of WP:CANVASS, no matter how unintended. If a fresh set of eyes is needed, I don't mind AFC, though. What do you think? Actualcpscm (talk) 10:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Actualcpscm. I think your plan makes sense. You can also simultaneously submit it to AfC with a note (I think submitter can do that? If not, I'm happy to as reviewer) to see Talk for the discussion between you & interested editors. I think this will also be helpful context for when the article returns to mainspace whether now or if folks think it needs continued work. StarMississippi14:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mississippi history
This book has some good info and photographs. I think it's in the public domain now? Do you know anyone who would be interested in scanning the image so we can better work up the political leaders and other from the era? Thanks for your help. I know there is a Mississippi wikiproject (I have no idea if it's active) but if you want to steer me somewhere that's fine. I figured you might be aboe to point me in the right direction. I'm not sure what's in the other volumes of the book.. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried again an I keep running into a hiccup. It's probably human error but I also wonder if there's a step I'm missing with respect to the redirect. I was very lucky to never deal much with these when Anthony Appleyard was around as he was a magician at these. @Primefac is there anything obvious you see? Otherwise I'll list it at requests. Thanks both! StarMississippi14:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's one of our perennial socks who's been hitting admin talkpages. An edit filter would probably take care of it. They've done that on half a dozen. Acroterion(talk)01:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again @Knitsey. If I were barnstar proficient, I'd award you one for patrolling the nonsense here. I have no idea why I am that editor's target but hopefully @ToBeFree's block ends the nonsense. Thanks both! StarMississippi01:52, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What's interesting is that the first two IPs that hit your page geolocated to the Netherlands, and the one who hit Acroterion's talk page, whereas this one is in the UK. Copy cat troll? Pathetic. Netherzone (talk) 03:03, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another one was from the Philippines. Sometimes the proxy edit nodes bunch up and you get a series from the same area, or they use a service that lets you choose. I wold treat them all as proxies. Acroterion(talk)03:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for the overnight cleanup. I'm offline the bullk of today and re-semi'ed it so you three (and any other helpers) don't have to deal. My only ongoing conversation with a new ish user is below and they're confirmed so we're good. StarMississippi12:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Y u mad at Frank Morano
Why’d you delete a page with several people who wrote that it was worthy of being on Wikipedia? Who left a mess in your breakfast bowl? Why you mad bro? RobotUSA (talk) 05:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Writing he was worthy doesn't mean he meets the guidelines for the project. If you believe my close was wrong, please file a deletion review. And please don't call people "bro" StarMississippi12:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In case Robot USA brings it up on their talk page, in an appeal against their ban or even in an email to you, I will have to point out here that I am Spud on RationalWiki. I am the one who deleted the badly copied and pasted article on Frank Morano on RationalWiki. @Robot USA: I am not the same person as Star Mississippi. The same person is not pursuing a vendetta against you or Frank Morano across multiple wikis. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 06:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When you closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Object show you salted the title, but the draft has been recreated again, this time under the title Draft:Object shows. Personally, I'm not a great fan of salting titles, because the effect is often just to cause future re-creations to come under different titles, and it's possible to watch the existing title, but not to watch every conceivable new variation of the title which may be used. JBW (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, I really wish the BFDI fanatics would find a new hobby. I see by Draft:Object Shows I'd moved on to just blocking by the time that version wandered across my radar. I'm happy to unprotect the singular draft if you think it would be helpful. Let me know, and thanks for flagging! StarMississippi23:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It might not make much difference, since the creations are already taking place under several different titles anyway. On the other hand, having one more obvious title available might reduce the pressure on them to come up with different titles, and therefore slightly likelihood of their finding one we haven't seen before. My own feeling is that protection isn't actually achieving anything, as it doesn't deter re-creation, so I would be inclined to leave it unprotected, but I don't feel very strongly about it. JBW (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Makes all the sense. Unprotecting momentarily.
I wish we had a filter that caught the nonsense, maybe one day.
It might be my advanced age or the number of hours I spend on this freakin' project but no page is coming to mind here. I look at probably hundreds of pages every day. Can you provide a link to whatever I handled that called me to mind? Thanks. LizRead!Talk!04:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of protecting pages, I do so pretty liberally but I find it works best when you protect an article on a person or organizations name, when you have persistent editors wanting to create autobiographies or paid editing rings. For something like BFDI, there are lots of different possible article titles but if your name is Hank Williams, there are not that many different varieties to create an article with that person's name.
By the way, I'm pretty sure that we already have an edit filter for BFDI. Don't ask me to find it for you but I believe I've come across it when looking at edit filter results in the past. LizRead!Talk!04:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that I deleted either one of these draft articles. I thought you pinged me because I deleted a related article. But maybe you just wanted me to share my fascinating thoughts about page protection. ;- ) LizRead!Talk!00:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Star_Mississippi. We worked well together (at least I think this!) a couple years ago to create the page for Susan Vogel. I'm creating another page, something I do pretty rarely, and would appreciate having some good smart people look it over before I take it live. Could I ask you to? I'd just paste the link here but see you are on vacation - enjoy. Thanks. Sullidav (talk) 15:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you published an article about Stillfront, our mother company and we would like to publish one for jawaker, we had a page on wikipedia but it was removed for some reason, can you help with this? Jojoarticles (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just me or does this place seem very empty this week? I mean, we've had a shortage of editors and admins working AFD for a few months now but this week, things have been extremely quiet. It's like everyone is vacation without their phones or something. Folks I used to see on a daily basis are just gone! I hope this is temporary. I saw you relisted a discussion so I knew you were here. LizRead!Talk!03:11, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's very quiet. Even my watchlist.
Personally here between two trips, happy to help as I can, although I'm about to log off for bed..
I know Cullen does it a lot, but I never have figured out how to edit from my phone. Caveat, I haven't tried too hard. Do you frequently admin from your phone? StarMississippi03:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted pages from my phone because I use Twinkle and you can check off boxes or use the Page tab with its drop down menu. But it's terrible for discussing things on a talk page because you can't cut and paste links and the like which I do a lot when discussing Wikipedia with other editors. So, I don't find it useful for responding to talk page queries unless it is only a text response. I now see that you have a banner saying you are on vacation! Sweet dreams! I'm on the other side of the country. LizRead!Talk!04:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I'm here. I just didn't take it off as I'm not as fully here as I would otherwise be, but there's probably a better template I should be using.
Yes, totally agree re: discussions. I tried once to make a note in an active discussion while I was offline and gave up quickly.
You closed this AfD as a Redirect today, an action not suggested by any of the editors involved in the AfD discussion, and there seemed to me that there was not a consensus. As a result of the closing, all the references and source material are deleted; is there a way to recover it? I spent quite a while researching the article subject and adding sources to it, which I thought I would have time to add to the father's page if the consensus were leaning towards delete. But now I would have to re-do all that research I did. Please tell me there is an easy workaround. BBQboffin (talk) 04:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! With the redirect, nothing is lost. You can access it here and use that to merge if a consensus develops. At the moment, there was more of one to delete the information, but a redirect helps the reader, which is why I created it. The issue with this, and why I didn't relist, is we have someone who presumably died in the pre internet era, so even without the language issue, sourcing is going to be an issue. Covering him within the article on his father is more useful than a page simply because he existed. Does that help? StarMississippi16:58, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks very much! I thought everything was lost but I see I was mistaken and the sources are indeed preserved at the link you provided. I can use that to add the material to the father's article and so it looks like you made a wise decision as a closer on this. Cheers! BBQboffin (talk) 17:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
